Inventors: Patent Reform Could Stymie American Ingenuity

The Patent Reform Act was passed last week by the Senate, and a similar bill is being considered in the House. If it passes, it will fundamentally alter the country's patent system, changing how patents are granted and what those patents cost. We asked several inventors and frequent PM advisers to tell us their thoughts on how the bill could change the culture of creativity and ingenuity in the U.S.

Most Read

On March 11, the Senate passed a series of reforms to U.S. patent law. If the House of Representatives passes a similar bill, it will amount to the first major overhaul of the country's patent system in nearly 60 years. One change in particular is causing some hullabaloo: a shift from the current first-to-invent system to the first-to-file approach used in most other countries. The new system would award patents based on who filed an application first rather than who originally generated the idea. Such a system could clear up confusion and reduce the numerous legal challenges that plague the current U.S. patent system—the patent office would have a clear-cut and unassailable document proving ownership of any invention. But some critics have raised red flags about how the change might affect small inventors, who don't have the resources to file patents as quickly as large corporations can. Popular Mechanics knows plenty of independent inventors, so we asked a few of them how they felt. The bottom line: They are worried.

Mario Salazar, inventor of the ProMiter-100 and other digital tools, fears that switching to a first-to-file system may lead people to apply for a patent before a new idea has been tested or even fully formed. "It's disturbing that anybody with a basic idea can just file a piece of paper without reducing it to practice," he says. "Before you can make the claim, you really should create the product, at least a proof prototype. Otherwise, [ideas] can be monopolized."

This rush to file could provide an unfair advantage to larger companies, Salazar says. "I think little inventors would say: 'I want to build a prototype, and take the proper channels.' Big corporations, they can just come up with ideas and ideas and ideas and never have to create the product," he says. "I think it's going to suppress the little guy."

However, Salazar doesn't think the new rules will keep determined or seasoned inventors out of the race. "You have to come up with a way to get around that hurdle, just like anything else," he says. "A piece of paper, that's not going to stop me from inventing, or from helping someone else with their invention." His advice to inventors discouraged by the proposed changes: "Continue to be creative, and put out more product."

Richard Phillips, president of paintball gear company International Survival and inventor of the No Surrender paintball vest, predicts the new law will prove an unfortunate boon for companies that offer to "help" inventors patent their ideas.

"There are a lot of crooked websites and commercials that say, 'Send us your ideas, we'll help you get them patented!' Well, you've got to be kidding me." These companies already take advantage of naive inventors, Phillips says, "just charging you for stuff you can do yourself online." If the new Patent Reform Act becomes law, he worries, these companies could begin to apply for their own patents on the ideas inventors send them. "All they've got to do is walk into the patent office and start filing them," he says.

Lonnie Johnson, whose 80-plus patents include advanced energy technologies and the Super Soaker water gun, says the law could hurt smaller companies as well as independent inventors. "As [head of] a small company, I can't always afford to file as soon as I invent," he says. "If I were a large company, I'd have a staff of attorneys who were experts in taking care of these things."

Smaller firms already struggle with intellectual property issues. "Especially when you have a lot of technology you're developing as a small company, trying to protect that technology is a real problem," Johnson says. If the patent reforms are passed and the system becomes first-to-file, "we could risk losing rights for our research because we try to hold on to trade secrets instead of filing for a patent."

Johnson says overhauling the patent system could also damage the nation's global standing in commerce and technology. "I think America's strength is in innovation," he says. "More and more, other countries are able to manufacture things cheaper, beating us in the marketplace in a lot of ways. So we need to do whatever we can to make sure America's ability to protect its ingenuity is as strong as it can be."

The new law may also cut short the careers of promising inventors, Johnson suggests. People who might have gone on to invent many new products and file for a slew of patents won't—because they weren't able to file for the first one. "You sometimes have a very innovative company, and if they come up with one idea, they can come up with many more—if they're successful," he says. "If they can't feed themselves, you lose that creativity."